'SportManagement Review, 2007,10, 133-1 58
O 2007 SMAANZ
Critical and Ethical Thinking in Sport
Management: Philosophical Rationales and
Examples of ~ e t h o d s
KEYWORDS: critical thinking, ethics, epistemology, ontology, pedagogy
Dwight H. Zakus
Griffith University
David Cruise Malloy
University of Regina
Allan Edwards
Griffith University
Critical thinking is recognised as a necessary central competency of
university graduates in a variety of professional fields. Many articles
identify and expound on the need for critical thinking pedagogy allied
with sound moral and ethical thought and behaviour. This paper seeks to
identify the central aspects of critical thinking within the ethical conceptual
terms of ontology, epistemology, and axiology for sport management
pedagogy. Within the concept of axiology is the basis of ethical thinking
and acting. We weave the discussion of critical thinking within an ethical
basis toward practical pedagogical activities for developing and advancing
critical thinking skills and abilities in sport management graduates.
Dwight Zakus is a Senior Lecturer in Sport Management at Griffith University. David Cruise
Malloy is a Professor on the Faculty of Kinesiology & Health Studies at the University of
Regina. Allan Edwards is a Senior Lecturer in Health and Physical Education at Griffith
University. Email for Dwight Zakus is d.zakus@griffith.edu.au
134
Zukus, Malloy & Edwards
Many tertiary educators in sport management programs at both the undergraduate
and postgraduate levels can be accused of producing technicist administrators rather
than managers. Students are guided through textbooks with information on how
they should address their work, how to think about problems and solutions, how to
be "checklist" managers, and how to produce results with some sort of correctness
and necessity. We question, along with Frisby (2005), whether these are the sort
of professional sport managers we seek to develop and advance the field. Are
these the types of knowledge and thought processes we seek for the future of sport
organisations? What type of praxis results from this truncated view of education?
To prepare sport management graduates to be productive, innovative leaders
in the wide variety of existing sport organisations, we must ensure that they have
the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities. It is widely argued that our graduates
develop critical and ethical thinking abilities to enhance their careers and their lives.
University graduate outcomes, in fact, list this type of thinking as a requisite feature
of their graduates. Also, professional bodies such as the North American Society for
Sport Management (NASSM) and business school accreditation bodies such as The
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business and the EQUIS program
of the European Foundation for Management Development also list these types of
thinking as curricular necessities.
This paper seeks to address a gap in many writings on critical and ethical
thinking while enhancing the interface of theory and practice (Zakus & Edwards,
2006). This paper premises this interface by first discussing critical thinking from
a philosophical basis to provide rationales for professional praxis, then makes
practical suggestions to enhance students' professional praxis. First, the identification
and background of the bases of different types of critical and ethical thinking are
explored. This includes a discussion of critical thinking and categories of ethical
thought. Second, the pedagogical tools to develop these abilities are described and
discussed. Conclusions are drawn from the links between critical thinking, ethics,
and pedagogical practice. The goal of such a synthesis is toward the notion of
professional praxis in sport management. Effort must be made, not only to develop
curricula that include ethics and critical thinking, but also to provide an active
and functional synthesis of these essential components of the liberally educated,
reflective, and reflexive "praxical" individual.
Critical Thinking: An Exegesis
In our personal and professional lives we rarely have the opportunity to think and
act as we please. In both spheres of our life we must make informed decisions to act.
Action without thought can be chaotic or perhaps dangerous. Knowing and acting
are two sides of the way we cany out our lives (i.e., our lived experience). Similarly,
action does not occur without some form of conscious thought included. As we urge
Critical and Ethical Thinking
135
students to become authentic (cf. Macquarrie, 1972) in their lives, it is important
that they have an understanding of the knowledge, ethics, and actions that are part
of that life. The question is, What is it we use to "find our way"? And, how do we
approach the process of thinking through the way to go?
Aristotle argued forcefully that the fundamental obligation of the human
was to flourish (i.e., eudaimonia). This was to be accomplished through a life of
contemplation, of reason and of virtuous praxis. This contemplative quality was
perceived to be superior to other sorts of life pursuits because it was deemed to be
continuous, self-sufficient and unique to humanity. The essence of this contemplative
life was the ability to think and to think well. Almost two millennia later, the German
philosopher Martin Heidegger (1966), suggested that our ability to think had eroded
to the point in which we have forgotten how to contemplate holistically.
We had in fact succumbed to the tendency to think calculatively at the expense
of meditative or reflective thinking. For Heidegger, calculative thinking is concerned
with logic, utility, description, categorisation, focus, and purpose; reflective thinking
is characterised by releasement, openness, and meaning. Reflective thinking focuses
not upon the specific, but upon the general; not upon the figure, but upon the ground
or the light that illuminates the figure (not unlike Plato's allegory of the shadows
of the cave). While calculative thinking is necessary for any of us to operate in the
mainstream "everydayness" of Western society, we will not come to understand
ourselves if we do not think reflectively. The implication of Heidegger's message
is but an echo of Socrates' call for deeper cognitive introspection, "the unexamined
life is not worth living."
Whether we refer to Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, or Heidegger, we are talking
about critical thinking. This is a cognitive activity in which the individual considers
an issue through a variety of lenses, processes the acquired data, and appropriates
it for his or her own knowledge base. Critical thinking involves neither the blind
acceptance of dogma nor the regurgitation of the perceived infallible utterances
of authorities. It is an authentic activity that results in owned (i.e., appropriated)
knowledge.
While critical thinking has been and continues to be perceived as an essential
quality in any educated person, it can be argued, as Heidegger did, that it is not a
skill that is readily observable either in our student population or in the population
at large. Zeigler (1994) wrote of the need for critical thinking in the curricula for the
allied professionals in sport studies, including sport management. Frisby (2005) also
argued for the inclusion of such thinking in the teaching and research skills inculcated
in sport management students. She argued for both a critical sport studies (CSS)
and a critical management studies (CMS), following Alvesson and Deetz (2000) in
this task. Likewise, Clegg, Courpasson, and Phillips (2006) point to Frisby's claim
and the link to our premise in the following: "critical management research, on
the other hand, is much more reflexive and consciously examines its philosophical
foundations, its theoretical assumptions, and its methods" (p. 282). Although these
136
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
approaches are highly important to the education and future functioning of sport
managers, both CSS and CSM are involved paradigmatic arguments that are beyond
this paper and are more focussed on the important management ability to do proper
research. Sport management teachers are encouraged to read and understand these
approaches as they build on what is proposed here.
Previous works (Malloy, Ross, & Zakus, 2003; Malloy & Zakus, 1995;
Zakus & Malloy, 1996) have argued, in various ways, for a fuller curriculum and
practice. These arguments point to the lacunae in most curricula used to develop
sport managers and to ways in which this can be overcome. To date, this work
has primarily focussed upon the ethical aspects of that development. This paper
seeks to go beyond this fundamentally important aspect of sport management. The
first premise argued is that ethics and critical thinking are two sides of the same
dialectic unity of the cognitive, affective, and practical bases of professional praxis.
Students must be taught, assisted, and encouraged to explore the underlying thought
processes and value positions. In other words, the focus is on the individual's ability
to think and act as the basis for a sound expert praxis and organisational engagement.
This framework involves three elements of philosophy: ontology, epistemology and
axiology.
Ontology: Frames of Thought and Action
Ontology is the study of existence. Specifically, we are concerned with the existence
of oneself, of others, of roles occupied, and of organisations and their purpose.
These are concerns that we rarely contemplate, critically or otherwise, and more
rarely articulate. Generally, we accept the fact that we and others exist, yet fail to
question the nature of this existence . Would ontological knowledge provide us with
a link to our approach to truth (epistemology) and behaviour (axiology)? We believe
it would.
Each of us has an ontological basis that is the foundation for how we observe,
think and act in the world. This ontological basis is socially constructed for us and by
us, as it is through social action and interaction that we develop and use knowledge
(Malloy & Zakus, 2004). Through the lifelong learning process of socialisation, we
come to develop our personality, knowledge base and membership in society. On
the other hand, we use our knowledge in different social locations and roles, which
demands that we use appropriate knowledge in those different settings.
This section first discusses the personal perspectives we develop through
socialisation. The second section looks at how professional perspectives are part of
education. Finally, the third section provides a discussion of how the two perspectives
exist within a professional person.
Critical and Ethical Thinking
137
Personal Perspectives
Saul (1995), in his critique of technocratic thought and action in modem society,
argues that "there is no need for universities to turn out 21-year old specialists
equipped with no memory of their civilization's experience, no ethical context, no
sense of the larger shape of their society" (p. 176). While there is much to Saul's
broader argument of technical rationality as ideology, we wish to discuss the points
he raises in terms of personal philosophies as the basis for discussing professional
identities and action. In particular, the way in which they are epistemic, value-laden
and contextual.
We argue that students must be led to understand their beliefs about the
essence of themselves and others, of leadership/followership and of the organisation
(i.e., of management theory), and of the perception of the good life we all seek to
achieve. This is perhaps the first thing that students must understand and explore. It
forms the basis for other sub elements (i.e., epistemology, axiology).
As our cognitive structures are learned from others and in many different
social contexts, we need critical thinking to develop and reveal authentic thought
and behaviour. To explore this framework we need to agree that socialisation (or
enculturation) describes the process through which we become members of a
cultural grouping (sport team, sport organisation, graduates of sport management
programs) and, ultimately, of society. When we speak of a culture, we are identifying
a complete way of life (Williams, 1977).
This also is central to our particularistic perspectives (Wolstertorff, 1996)
that are the basis of our narrative identities (i.e., our personality and social being
that are expressed through language and gesture). In other words, it is our actively
constructed everyday knowledge that gives us cognitive (knowing) access to our
reality (lived experience) that we espouse (in dialogue), that is communicated
through our thoughts and actions (that is here identified as praxis).
A key element of the particularistic cognitive structure is that it embraces
values. This allows us privileged cognitive access to facts of relevancy to our lives
(Wolsterstorff, 1996), and to notice and believe in particular parts of the infinite
chaos of the world. Whereas knowledge itself filters through ideas, this appreciative
part of our knowledge filters through values. Here facts and values, or beliefs and
normative judgments, are linked. They are both parts of one's cognitive and moral
structure. For better or worse, these value filters form our biases.
Humans Are Malleable
We change as we pass through life. In these different social and cultural contexts
we encounter and work our way through different ideas, beliefs, values and norms.
The degree to which these aspects affect our thinking and acting depends upon how
skilled we are at thinking about these new elements. Certainly, many of these new
perspectives are ideological. This makes the challenge greater, especially in terms
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
138
of one's values. For it is at this point that the powers of different ideologies make
the greatest challenge to our personal, espoused cognitive structure and ultimately
our professional praxis. These personal perspectives provide us with theories-in-use
(Schon, 1987). This is where we begin our uniquely human activity in the world.
Professional Perspectives
A central activity to the development of a profession is establishing a specialised
body of knowledge which is passed on to future practitioners, carefully protected
and developed, and to which claims of being a professional are rigorously controlled.
The hallmark of a professional person is the ability to make sound, knowledgeable,
and ethical decisions based on a number of pieces of information and ideas. Donald
Schon (1987) wrote that
professional practitioners bring different personal perspectives to their professional
work, but they also share a common body of explicit, more or less systematically
organised professional knowledge and what Geoffrey Vickers has called an
"appreciative system" the set of values, preferences, and norms in terms of which
they make sense of practice situations, formulated goals and directions for action,
and determine what constitutes acceptable professional conduct. (p. 33)
-
This professional praxis is shared, particular, and ameliorated by various
cultural contexts of professional life. A re-socialisation takes place and personal
perspectives are challenged. This process has potential contradictory and confusing
aspects (Liedtka, 1989). Brookfield (1991) identified two activities in this process.
First, one must identify and challenge held assumptions to develop a new "contextual
awareness" and to then explore and imagine the alternatives presented by professional
praxis (pp. 15-22). These two activities are seen to be "interconnected in bewildering
and idiosyncratic configurations according to the people and contexts involved (p.
15). How one proceeds, and how well one does in this activity depends on what
Paul (1990) identifies as monological (involving one logic or weak sense) versus
multilogical (involving many logics or strong sense) cognitive activity (p. 246). The
obvious weakness of the first form demands no fiuther discussion at this point; it is
well discussed in Zeigler's (1994, 1995) works. The second, however, is important.
Paul (1990) describes the multilogic approach as both dialogic and dialectic.
A dialogic approach implies dialogue. It involves speaking and listening
activities where many individuals systematically enter genuine discussion with
others. Dialogue of this type is entered with empathy for the thinking of others. This
is certainly central to the professions. Paul (1 990) argues that this allows us to use
the thinking of others or to reason hypothetically from the assumptions of others
in our thinking. Simply put, dialogic thinking involves the "extended exchange
between different points of view or frames of reference" (p. 246).
Dialectical thinking occurs when ideas or reasoning come into conflict with
each other and we need to assess their various strengths and weaknesses. Here the
Critical and Ethical Thinking
139
notion of contradictions is acknowledged. Both dialogic and dialectic thinking are
necessary to the development of professionals. Although cognate frameworks are
part of a particular profession, there also may be different .practical approaches to
the application or use of that specific knowledge in that profession. These ways
of thmking (and therefore knowing) are part of what Brooklield (1991) labels as
reflective skepticism, Schon (1987) as artistry (or reflection-in-action), and King
and Kitchener (1994) as reflective judgment.
Professional frames are acknowledged as scientific. The knowledge produced
in and through professional fields is based on institutionalised practices and norms.
If scientific knowledge is not used with critical thinking, then what Saul (1993) and
many others have identified as technicism, managerialism, positivism, or scientism
(i.e., ideologies) will prevail. Here the knowledge or application of that knowledge
goes unquestioned. Here the theorylpractice interface provides challenges to both
educators and students.
The Interaction of Personal and Professional Perspectives
Each individual will experience the linkages and challenges between personal
(particularistic) and professional perspectives in unique ways. For some it will be a
subtle change, for others one demanding struggle. In either case, we are suggesting
that students will come to their own praxis. That is, they will be reflective practitioners
(Edwards, 1999).
Reflective practitioners have, first, to understand their own perspective, its
ideas, beliefs, assumptions, values and norms. Second, in their professional activity
they have to move beyond standardised thinking and acting. The world is a complex
and messy place. Often the real, the practical situations of professional practice are
such that the knowledge or applications obtained in education are inadequate or
inappropriate. In their decision-making and actions, the practitioner, therefore, must
go beyond the technical problem-solving obtained in professional education.
Rein (1983) makes the case for our theory-fact-value frameworks being
central to our professional activity. Although we seek objectivity in our professional
action, this is not possible in reality. The way we frame and name problems to be
solved are based not only on our theory (episteme), but also on how we identify
and integrate facts in the practical case at hand. The process of naming and framing
is identified as problem setting. This activity is distinctive from problem solving,
which is often used in the first instance. In turn, we may not be addressing the
situation in any meaningful way. The argument here is that we should name and
frame to set the problem, and then seek ways of solving the problem that move
beyond standard approaches of the "case" (see also Lawson, 1984; Rein & Schon,
1977; Schon, 1980 for further discussion of this process).
Overall, our values influence the framing and naming process. The more we
are able to get beyond technical problem solving and to use our framing and naming
capabilities, the better able we will be to address complex, messy, and problematic
140
Zakus,Malloy & Edwards
situations found in real life and in professional activity. This movement beyond
biases (tunnel vision) toward useful and meaningful heuristics (Piattelli-Palmarini,
1994) is the goal sought here.
Schon (1987) summarises this. Here the practitioner cannot solve the
problem in instrumental, known ways. They must think creatively, which Brookfield
(1991) describes as "field-independent, lateral, holistic, divergent, syllabus-free" (p.
114). A central implication of this statement is that students be educated in what
Ramsden (1992), describes as a deep (i.e., with an intention to understand) approach
to learning. Here the demand for not acting upon immediate sensory information
or through "recipe" actions is essential. Further, it demands the type of thinking
de Bono (1978) labels lateral thinking, and Gleick (1996) as non-linear thinking if
we are to move away from the vertical, dogmatically objective thought common
in much current writing and practice in professional life. This also demands going
beyond the monological approach espoused by Zeigler (1995).
We must help our students develop beyond standardised ways of thinking
and acting. We must understand and challenge our perspectives to begin to make
sound and ethical decisions as individuals and as professionals. By seeking the
deeper frameworks of our thoughts, actions and different situations, we become
critical thinkers (Ramsden, 1992). We need not accept solutions as they immediately
appear to us. Also, as many theorists note, the heart of rationality is irrationality.
This sets the challenge for us to deal with the theory-fact-value basis of our thought
and action to avoid personal and professional conflict, and to be the most authentic
person possible. How one thinks does not appear automatically. It is the result of
experience, learning, and processes by which we become functional members of
society.
Epistemology: Knowledge and Thought
Epistemology is the study of knowledge, of truth. The concern of this sub discipline
is essentially "how do we know what we know." Our knowledge is acquired
empirically, rationally, and transrationally. We can use and abuse each of these
realms of knowledge by carelessly or unconsciously accepting inappropriate
assumptions. Heidegger's indictment against the modem student is that we are
too focused upon the calculative inquiry into truth at the expense of the meditative
search. This penchant for positivism is of course at the expense of the contemplative
and meditative searching that Socrates and Heidegger extol (cf. Macintosh &
Whitson, 1990; Ross, 1994). What we argue for in this paper is not the elimination
of the empirical search for truth, but for the student's ability to think critically and
holistically.
A central feature of the human species is our incredible capacity for thought.
With this capacity we have the power to develop and critique knowledge and apply
Critical and Ethical Thinking
141
it in constantly changing and creative ways. We do not have to take what is given
or available, in material terms and in terms of ideas (thought), to survive. Humans
create and apply knowledge in multitudinous ways.
We have linked knowledge and thought here. This agrees with Paul's (1990)
dialectic relationship between knowledge and thought:
We often talk of knowledge as though it could be divorced from thinking, as
though it could be gathered up by one person and given to another in the form of
a collection of sentences. When we talk in this way we forget that knowledge, by
its very nature, depends on thought. Knowledge is produced by thought, analyzed
by thought, comprehended by thought, organized, evaluated, maintained, and
transformed by thought. Knowledge exists, properly speaking, only in minds that
have comprehended and justified it through thought. (p. 46)
When we develop knowledgelthought structures (epistemes) we develop
ideologies. It is these frameworks of ideas that guide our thinking. Further, we
acknowledge that students come for education with a well-developed cognitive
structure. That is, each has a perspective, tacit knowledge, cognitive structure,
world-view, or narrative identity. These simply are different ways of labelling our
basic, or at least initial, knowledge framework.
We obtain these frameworks from many different parts of our lived social
experience. Ideologies are part of our social and cultural world. Further, ideology
often operates in ways that are not always part of our conscious thought. As Marchak
(1981) wrote:
social reality doesn't appear to us directly. It is revealed to our understanding
through a screen of assumptions, beliefs, explanations, values, and unexamined
knowledge. Together, these elements of the screen comprise an ideology, and the
ideology directs our attention to some realities but not to others; interprets what
our senses transmit but in terms of what is already accepted as truth. (p.1)
In short, ideologies operate as perceptual filters that become part of our
perspective on the world. They are basic to what we see or do not see (or hear, smell,
feel, taste). These filters orient our senses to become aware of selected, different
observable elements of the world.
What, then, are the elements of what we also call frames, perspectives,
epistemes, or knowledge frameworks? Basic to these frames are beliefs, which
are a "statement[s] about reality that is accepted by an individual as true. A belief
differs from a value, in that while a value concerns what a person regards as good or
desirable, a belief is a statement of what is regarded as true and factual" (Theodorson
& Theodorson, 1969, pp. 28-29). Further, beliefs are based on a number of scientific
and non-scientific sources. Rather than simply using or focussing on beliefs, we often
base our thinking on values, or on learned combinations of beliefs and values.
Here the concept of value-referents is central to our individual perspectives.
142
Zakus,Malloy & Edwards
Values are "general conceptions of the desirable goals, or ends, which people should
strive to attain and criteria by which actions should be evaluated. They constitute
standards against which people evaluate goals and actions" (Hagedorn, 1994, p. 66).
Values are central to the formation of axiological frameworks, which are discussed
in the next section.
Values are made real and active through norms. Norms are simply ways of
behaving. People may hold the same values, but may not always follow the norms
implied by those values. When values are assumed to be the basis of action and
knowledge, we may act in ways that are incompatible or conflicting. Further, we
encounter competing frames and appreciative (value) systems at different points in
our lives. These competing frames add further thoughts and behaviours that appear
contradictory and confusing (cf. Liedtka, 1989).
Here, then, we encounter difficulties with assumptions. We identify
assumptions as "the seemingly self-evident rules about reality that we use to help
us seek explanations, make judgments, or select various actions. They are the
unquestioned givens that, to us, have the status of self-evident truths" (Brookfield,
1991, p. 44). Often we discuss assumptions under the term opinion. Opinions are
the expression of attitudes. Attitudes are based upon the beliefs and values we hold.
Assumptions then can be of two types, psychological and cultural.
Brookfield (199 1) speaks of psychological assumptions, which are "inhibitory
rules that are unconscious but that cause anxiety and guilt when we violate them"
(p. 4 9 , and of cultural assumptions, which "are embedded in the dominant cultural
values of a society and are transmitted by social institutions. They inform our
conduct in political, economic, occupational, and religious spheres" (p. 45). In
other words, they form ideologies that become part of our cognitive structures.
Both psychological and cultural assumptions are formed through socialisation and
enculturation. They often remain unexamined and unquestioned.
We often do not question our own thinking. We operate with a set of
ideas, beliefs, assumptions, and values that we rarely question. In science and the
professions we have as a key task the need to question the assumptions we hold. As
part of our research and education we seek a deeper and broader understanding of
the world around us and of professional activities within that world.
In particular, we donot often question the ideas andvalues built into knowledge
structures and ideologies, and passed on to us by parents, peers, teachers, coaches,
religious leaders, professors, administrators, and others. The world is pre-interpreted
for us by those we encounter throughout life. It is these pre-interpretations that give
sense and order to our world. Many forms of knowledge that have any scientific
backing often go unquestioned and unchallenged in our society. Further, these are
the ideas and values we receive from educators, coaches, sport administrators, and
to some extent religious and political leaders, who seek validated knowledge from
their expert group or groups (e.g., university scholars, a synod, "think tanks" of
different ideological leanings, or many specialised [e.g., sport] bureaucracies).
Critical and Ethical Thinking
143
Two ironies are present here. First, we fail to challenge received knowledge
and value structures and, therefore often perpetuate, employ or espouse knowledge
that limits or fails us in our attempts to operate in the world. Second, we reduce our
own natural abilities to think. By this we mean that our innate abilities to perceive
and to think about our observations is limited, rather than freed.
Strongly imposed ideas, beliefs, values, and meanings deny our capacity to
think and to challenge those ideas, beliefs, values, and meanings. In particular, our
ability to reason through common sense and intuitive interpretation is constrained
by the imperative of scientific knowledge. We can accept the fact that our ideas
cannot be as sound as individuals who study and write upon different subjects, but
this is not the argument being made here. This leads us to believe that any thought
other than that provided by science or other experts is weak, faulty, or incomplete.
When a belief or value is imposed upon us and impacts on our ability to think, then
we are constrained (see Fernandez-Balboa, 1995 for a parallel critique). Our ability
to think is, in fact, truly unbounded.
Axiology: Values and Thought
Axiology is a division of philosophy that includes the study of values and ethics
(Flew, 1979; Hodgkinson, 1983, 1996). It provides us with the theoretical basis for
our understanding of why we behave the &ay we do and how we ought to behave.
Where values appear to be more descriptive of our behaviour (i.e., are explicitly
manifested by our behaviour), ethics are prescriptive. Surrounding these theoretical
elements are the perceived realities which include an individual's personal existence,
the existence of others, and the structures in which he or she exists (i.e., societies
and organisations). The means by which we acquire the knowledge or perception of
these realities are driven by our epistemological orientation. Therefore, an individual
will behave in a particular manner as a function of the knowledge acquired and the
lund of information that is accepted and appropriated. One can argue that axiology
and epistemology are manifested in our abilities to think critically as well as behave
ethically (i.e., praxis). If one is unaware of their personal ontological orientation
and axiological grounding, and if knowledge is restricted to a particular realm (e.g.,
empiricism), then ethical conduct is at the whim of external sources and becomes
the antithesis of authenticity and critical thinking.
The relevance of the discussion presented thus far to ethics in sport
administrationis significant.Administrativetheory generally,andsport administration
specifically, have been traditionally cast as, at best, amoral. Sport administration
has been professionalised and popularised as a value neutral or value free science
by many of the theorists and practitioners in the form of neo-Taylorism, neoWeberianism, and neo-behaviourism (all within the new mantra of managerialism)
with their implicit and explicit assumptions of efficiency, effectiveness, and
144
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
production of organisational members, volunteers, and, most of all, athletes. This
sport administration Zeitgeist is obvious as one reviews the content of the field's
literature. This is also the project of critical social science and critical management
studies. With the latter, the relations and dynamics of power and domination are
reduced from view or not challenged at all.
As a consequence of the scientific and behavioural orientation to the
profession, ethics has played a minimal role as an educative or practical component
of the sport administrator's repertoire (see Malloy, Prapavessis, & Zakus, 1994).
This situation is exacerbated by the fact that in an era when managerial behaviour is
becoming more and more reactively subjected to ethical critique by sport organisation
members, volunteers, athletes, government, and the public, the administrator is
unable to accommodate ethical discourse because he or she lacks the tools of critical
and ethical thought and analysis. Where would this person have received these
tools? Certainly not from their university education, as at least two studies have
demonstrated (Malloy, 1992; Malloy, Prapavessis, & Zakus, 1994) and a cursory
examination of current sport management curricula suggest.
A recent and predictable approach to overcome the inherent danger of
ethical ignorance is the need for a formalised code of ethics. Presumably, if a code is
provided to the managers and members, they will follow it. This approach endorses
the traditional view of organisational control, as members are herded toward
behaviour with no attempt to provide any cognitive moral growth. When faced with
a dilemma, they need only to find the appropriate rule and the resolution emerges.
This strategy is perhaps necessary, if the managers and members are incapable of
critical thought and thus unable to provide comprehensive ethical analysis.
Problems, however, are rarely matched with a priori rules and resolutions and
are, as a result, sterile and incomplete. This argument demands that the student and
practitioner's ability to think critically is fundamental for their ability to recognise
and respond to the unavoidable array of ethical dilemmas (obvious and latent) that
will be faced throughout their career. This, in turn, brings us back to values and the
need for a value clarification exercise.
Ethics assists us in determining what we ought to do; values, on the other
hand, provide us with the background to understand why we do what we do.
While many definitions of values exist, one of the most concise and powerful
is the following: "A value is a concept of the desirable with a motivating force"
(Hodgkinson, 1983, p.36). This definition implies that behaviour is a direct result of
what we value because a value has a "motivating force." This obviously applies to
those values that we actually hold as opposed to ones that we say we hold or would
like to hold (espouse) but then fail to act upon them by making them theories-in-use
(Argyris & Schon, 1980).
Values that we actually hold are often termed, "core values," as opposed to
intended, adopted, and weak values (England, Dhingra, & Aganval, 1974). Core
values are the values that lead to action regardless of the circumstance. Intended
Critical and Ethical Thinking
145
values are those that we intend to hold, yet these may be influenced by external
variables. For example, I may intend to walk to work everyday, however, when
it is -36" Celsius outside my home, I will drive my car. Adopted values are those
that the individual adopts as a function of the pressure to conform to a societal or
organisational norm. They are adopted but not necessarily intemalised (i.e., they
are not core values). I may say I hold a particular value and I may even act on this
value, however, outside the group or organisation I will not base my behaviour on
this particular value.
Finally weak values are those that I say I value, yet these values never
translate into action. For example, a sport administrator may suggest that he or
she values grass root sport programming; yet when budgets are developed, he or
she directs the majority of funding to elite programmes. Therefore, that which is
truly valued, which has a motivating force, is the elite and not the developmental
programme. In this example, elite sport could be a core, intended, or adopted value;
developmental sport is a weak value.
Christopher Hodgkinson (1983) provides another way to assess our
value orientation. He suggests that there are four levels of valuing; each level is
progressively more complex and philosophically defendable. The most basic
rationale for valuing is termed preference (Type IV). Here a value is held because
the individual likes it. It is sub-rational and self-serving. The next level is consensus
(Type 111). This rationale is based upon the will of the group. Hodgkinson argues
that at this level the individual is more involved cognitively in the decision to value;
however, it is in response to the general preference of the crowd. The third level in
the hierarchy fully employs one's cognitive complexity, as the value is held as a
result of the consequences it generates (Type 11). The thought process is similar to
the scientific model in which hypotheses are tested and rigorous logic and analysis
takes place. The highest level of valuation is based upon universal principles that
are individually developed (Type I). One holds values at the principled level through
having an authentic commitment to a self-chosen duty. For example, the rationale for
valuing water may be derived from each of these levels. I may value water because: I
like the taste (preference), it is a popular drink (consensus), drinking water is healthy
(consequence), andlor it may be perceived to be holy water (principle).
Ethics and values are tied together intimately. If what I ought to do is a core
value, then presumably I will do it. If it is an intended or adopted value then I may
do it. If I know what I ought to do, and this duty is a weak value, I probably won't
do it. For example, if I know that ethically I should not play an injured athlete, yet
I hold this as a weak value and winning as a core, intended, or adopted value, and
the ethical treatment of athletes as a weak value, then I will play injured athletes.
The point to be made from this discussion is that in order for the sport management
student to develop knowledge of the authentic self, reflection upon what one values
and how it is valued is critical. The student should reflect upon: What are his or her
core values? What values are weakly held and why? What are their instrumental
values? And, what terminal values do they lead toward?
146
Zakus, Mulloy & Edwards
Pedagogy: Critical and Ethical Thought
Zakus and Malloy (1996) argued that professional education begins from the students'
current knowledge. That is, it sets out challenges to their current assumptions (i.e.,
knowledge structure) (cf. Daniel & Bergman-Drewe, 1998; Fernandez-Balboa,
1995). Laying new content, ideas, concepts, and theories over an unexplored and
understood conceptual capacity is not likely to benefit either party.
This demands two different but integral starting points in our teaching. First,
as Biggs (1996) noted,
learners arrive at meaning by actively selecting, and cumulatively constructing,
their own knowledge, through both individual and social activity. . . . the learner
brings an accumulation of assumptions, motives, intentions, and previous
knowledge that envelopes every teachingllearning situation and determines the
course and quality of the learning that may take place. (p. 348)
This aligns with the need for students to explore their knowledge and moral
structures. It also points to the need to understand how the student does learn. Here
again it is beyond this paper to explore this topic. Suffice it to say that students
learn in different ways and that the pedagogical practices employed must consider
these differences in disposition and approach (cf. Daniel & Bergman-Drewe, 1998;
Entwistle, 1997; Kolb, 1985; Ramsden, 1992).
Whilst this topic is not addressed here, we must consider what Biggs (1996)
identifies as alignment of objectives, learning, and assessment wherein educators
need to "focus on the performative aspect of understanding: . . . [that] require
students to interact thoughtfully with a novel task, to reflect on appropriate feedback,
to search to see how they can improve" (p. 35 1); to simply show that they can act
differently with content in unfamiliar contexts. But how does this best occur?
Reviewing the literature for this work disclosed a number of themes and
circularities. The key issues identified had to do with: the degree of formality of
critical thinking, the domains of critical thinking, and the educability of students
in critical thinking. As many of the key thinkers are philosophers the debate ran
to some length. Many discussions focussed on what deBono (1978) calls "vertical
thinking" and Gleick (1996) calls, "linear thinking." This was best exemplified in
our area by the works of Zeigler (1994, 1995). Zeigler, while mentioning the broader
area of thought in the "allied professions," basically proposes an informal type of
logic. That is, he suggests a lighter version of formal logic as the central aspect to be
taught and used. In reality, this is a chimera of wider claims for critical thinking. But
he is not alone in this aspect of the debate.
Agreement is made here that sport professionals need the skills to analyse,
evaluate, and make effective arguments and judgments in thought and action.
As Jones and Brown (1993, p. 72) note, "critical thinking is both a philosophical
orientation toward thinking and a cognitive process characterized by reasoned
Critical and Ethical Thinking
147
judgment and reflective thinking." This is also evident in some of the literature
cited below. However, as Zeigler frames this practice it is much more like a module
on logic than on a way to enhance professional praxis. McBride (1992) limits his
discussion to a substantive area of the broader profession and does not add to the
literature in the broader field nor in sport management. It is argued simply that these
approaches narrow and leave out much of what is valuable in critical thinking.
The second debate focuses on whether critical thinking is course specific or
generalisable across fields. Here the debate focuses on the centrality of the liberal
arts versus professional fields, and whether the substantive content of the courses
are conducive to critical thinking. The perspective adopted here is that an underlying
epistemology exists in the substantive material of our field, and that this must come
out in our teaching. Further, and in contrast to much academic practice, critical
t h h h n g should be contained across the curriculum and not simply as a stand-alone
first year subject.
Accepting that there is a substantive epistemology in sport management, the
third main debate needs no fkther discussion as it separates individuals into have
and have not categories in terms of their abilities to think critically. Both the content
and the generalisability of critical thinking are conducive for incipient development
of sport management professionals. If instructors do not teach, develop, and explore
these skills in all students, then how can decisions be made about their abilities
(which implies that instructors have the ability and are able to teach it to others)?
The various terms used to identify a type of thinking that is not narrow, nonreflective, or otherwise constrained is critical thinking (or one of its many labels).
The usage here does not imply the narrow version of logical (i.e., deductive and
inductive) thinking so often identified with this category of thought. As Brookfield
(1991) notes, critical thinking "entails much more than the skills of logical analysis
taught in so many college courses on critical thinking. It involves calling into
question the assumptions underlying our customary, habitual ways of thinking and
acting and then being ready to think and act differently on the basis of this critical
questioning" (p. 1) or, more simply, "critical thinking is a praxis of alternating
analysis and action" (p. 22). It is identifying one's authentic framework as a basis
for building an authentic meaning perspective for action in the world.
This presents a much broader and deeper challenge to the individual. First,
Brookfield's (1991) description of this challenge must be noted. He wrote that
thinking critically-reflecting on the assumptions underlying our and others' ideas
and actions, and contemplating alternative ways of thinking and living-is one of
the important ways in which we become adults. When we think critically, we come
to our judgments, choices, and decisions for ourselves, instead of letting others
do this on our behalf. We refuse to relinquish the responsibility for making the
choices that determine our individual and collective futures to those who presume
to know what is in our own best interests. We become actively engaged in creating
our personal and social worlds. (p. x)
148
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
This implies that instructors have completed their own work on their personal
knowledge structures. It further urges them to look at how their own biographies
have developed in terms of other significant persons (and in many different social
locations) over their lives (cf. Mills, 1959). In other words, how have relatives,
friends, teachers, other persons, coaches, and sport administrators affected their
perspectives?
Furthermore, instructors must make critical thinking a central aspect of their
educated perspective. Although most professional schools are structured around a
curriculum that follows the "basic science, applied science, and technical skills of
day-to-day practice" (Schon, 1987, p. 9) format, students must be encouraged not to
wait until later in their education to begin the process of critical thinking and ethical
decision making. Both types of thinking, in both personal and professional life, must
be an ongoing activity of lived experience.
A number of suggestions have been offered in other papers (e.g., FernandezBalboa, 1995; Zakus & Malloy, 1996) toward such teaching practices. Certainly the
critiques of lecturing point to difficulties with that approach. In reality, however,
under economic rationalism and the managerial model of higher education, this is
a predominant model. As Stunkel (1998) and McKeachie (1986) argue, this format
can be employed for developing critical thinking, even though it is a less suitable
teaching strategy. More often, strategies to teach critical thinking, such as those
identified by Brigharn (1993), require "teaching critical thinking skills requires
participatory learning strategies. Teaching critical thinking requires a reduction of
content. Areduction in content requires . . . educators to teach concepts andprinciples,
not facts" (p. 54). Suffice it to say, it demands that the lecturer/instructor be attentive
to differences in learning styles, and to the range of possible pedagogical strategies
when seeking to develop critical, deep thinkers, and to then have the patience, risktaking, and political strength to carry through such practices.
If we wish to develop professionals who operate with a form of critical
skepticism, we must use "critically responsive teaching [that] aims to nurture in
students a critically alert, questioning cast of mind" (Brookfield, 1990, p. 24).
Clearly this demands such a spirit in ourselves as teachers, and also demands that
we use a variety of teaching strategies to allow our students to do the same.
Educational Practices to Achieve Critical and Ethical Thinking
The focus above has been on the theoretical background and on the need for
understanding the current position of sport management students. Sport management
educators also need to be supported, as they are also "students" of critical thinking
and are of undeniable importance in setting the stage for critical thinking. Many
authors have argued that the needs of educators must be met before they are able
to implement appropriate and effective teaching methods to foster critical thinking.
Sport management practice requires creative, personalised solutions to unpredictable
Critical and Ethical Thinking
149
circumstances. Strategies utilised by educators when conducting classes could
greatly influence students' thinking. Critical thinking is not developed through one
lecture or one field experience. Instead, skill in thinking develops over time through
varied experiences.
Various techniques areused to develop critical thinking, and sport management
educators face many challenges when teaching this concept. Instructional methods
to enhance critical thinking should include creative approaches to open students'
minds, broaden and augment their ways of thinking, and facilitate the process of
developing critical thinking abilities. Drawing on the literature, the following section
contains seven instructional methods to foster critical thinking abilities. The seven
techniques are value audit, questioning, small group activities, role-play, debate,
(which were utilised as instructional strategies in the classroom), case studies, and
journaling in the clinical field.
Value Audit
Perhaps the most basic exercise to perform is the investigation of one's own values.
A value audit directs us to explore what we value and, equally important, why we
value. The audit is a relatively simple exercise with profound implications as it
makes the implicit drivers of behaviour explicit to the individual. In a classroom
context, students might be asked to list five values that they hold in the context of
being a sport administrator. This in itself is an interesting and revealing discussion;
however, the second task is to provide a rationale for these values. As discussed
earlier, one may hold a value on a variety of levels (Hodgkinson, 1983, 1996) and
intensities (England, Dinghra, & Aganval, 1974). Students, once having identified
a set of administrative values should be encouraged to identify the rationale for
holding each value. This then becomes an opportunity for discussion and debate.
Questioning
Questioning as an activity to develop critical thinking abilities is well supported in
the literature (Elliott, 1996; Sellappah, Hussey, Blackmore, & McMurray, 1998).
It is an old technique with an illustrious history. Socrates first used questioning to
stimulate critical thinking some 2,400 years ago when he used this technique to spur
his students to deeper levels of contemplation. Anderson (1961, cited in Daly, 1998)
claimed "it is purposeful thinking about ideas and assumptions and the weighing of
logical arguments against one another which assists in clarifying those ideas and
positions" (p. 324).
Another approach towards higher-level thinking is the filtering of information
by identifying key issues, exploring reasons, and identifying ambiguous words and
assumptions (Browne & Keeley, 1986). Questioning can help students to learn and
search for alternative explanations through promoting openness in inquiry to evaluate
reasoning, identify value preferences, and judge the significance of various opinions
to the situation at hand. King (1995) believed that the hallmark of a critical thinker
150
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
was an inquiring mind. These authors assert that good thinkers are good questioners,
in that they question whatever they see, read, hear, or experience. Critical thinkers
are challenging, analysing, searching for explanations and alternatives, and reflecting
on relations between an experience and what they already know.
Good thinkers also frame questions in a manner such as, "What is the nature
of this?" "What does this mean?" "Why is it happening?"'What if?" Chubinski
(1996) and King (1995) emphasised that formulating such questions can stimulate
creative skills to predict outcomes and create alternatives. Critical thinking could
also be enhanced if sport management educators asked questions that encourage
students to self-question. Educators can model the Socratic method and then have
students use this method with each other. Readings from a variety of course texts
would be suitable material to complete this exercise.
Small Group Activity
Another commonly used technique to foster critical thinking skill development is
small group activity. Small group activity encourages student interaction and enables
them to share their ideas and examine individual assumptions. Small groups are less
threatening for students and promote comfort to formulate questions for which they
may not have the answers. Small group activity promotes collaborative working
with peers asking the questions and then answering each other's questions, thereby
generating an environment that promotes debate. When reconvening in a large
group, students have the opportunity to compare points of view and interpretations
and to "contrast their critical thinking styles with their peers" (Neill, Lachat, &
Taylor-Panek, 1997, p. 31).
Students could be assigned different management roles within a hypothetical
sport organisation for which they have to work through aparticular issue or simulated
annual meeting (such as preparing materials for a board meeting). Students could be
assigned positions such as finance officer, marketing director, personnel manager and
work through the process of preparing current statements on where the organisation
is and where it might go, without giving them pre-set opinions or perspectives.
In the large group follow-up, the thinking and decision-making techniques can
be compared and used as the basis for analysing each student's critical thinking
ability.
Debate
The process of debate entails analysing, critiquing and constructing arguments - all
of which are vital elements of critical thinking and the higher level skills required to
participate in this activity. Doyle (1996) indicated that debate is an effective teaching
method that develops the skill of argumentation. Debate is an experiential learning
activity and is different from a discussion in that debate presupposes an established
situation on an issue - a "pro" and "con" (or meditative vs. calculative) argument of
a particular assertion or proposition to solution of a problem. In order to convince the
Critical and Ethical Thinking
15 1
observers to accept or reject a given position, debaters provide reasoned arguments
for and against an issue (Garrett, 1996).
Fuszard (1989) and Venetzian and Corrigan (1 996) also support the value of
debate as a teaching and learning strategy, indicating that debate requires diligent
inquiry and critical thinking skills and offers students the opportunity to learn new
content in an exciting way. Preparation for a debate requires students to thoroughly
investigate and research issues and use reason, logic, and analysis when defining
opinions about a problem. In the process of a debate, participants need to react
spontaneously, readily calling upon their reasoning, logic, and judgement. In order
to defend their positions, participants appreciate the need to review current literature
to identify supporting facts and to procure research data so they can anticipate
opposing arguments - the basis of critical thinking. When presenting a debate
appropriately, participants can learn to difTerentiate between fact and inference,
which will improve their cognitive skills, especially in analysing problems, and will
therefore gain appreciation for the complexity of issues.
These skills are important for sport managers in their role as part of a
multidisciplinary team. Team participation requires individuals to justify their
opinions in light of different views and agendas. Experience with the skills
developed through debate provides the "mechanism for the expression of opinions
through persuasive arguments and prompt analytical rebuttals" (Garrett, 1996, p.
38). There are a number of contentious issues in sport management that can be set
up as debate topics. One might be on the role of managerialism in community sport
organisations, the use of performance enhancing substances and practices by youth
and adult athletes, or the role of boards in governing sport bodies. These can be set
up as individually-based debates or established through small group arrangements.
Role-Play
Another form of participatory learning that promotes critical thinking is that of
role-play, as it involves activities that simulate scenarios of real-life situations and
allows students to place themselves into circumstances they have not previously
experienced. Students have an opportunity to become actively engaged while in a
non-threatening environment to promote critical thinking abilities (Porter Ladousse,
1988).
Through the power of role-play, people can be put into circumstances that
conflict with their normal lifestyle and choices, hence providing opportunities to
appreciate alternative views and opinions on a first hand basis in a non-threatening
environment (Chubinski, 1996). Fuszard (1989) described role-play as an effective
means for developing decision-making and problem-solving abilities. The problemsolving process (identification of the problem, data collection and evaluation of
potential outcomes, exploration of alternatives and approaching decisions to be
implemented) can be analysed within the context of a role-play situation. The postplay discussion gives an opportunity for faculty to provide analysis and formation
of new ideas and strategies.
Zukus, Mulloy & Edwards
Case Studies
A form of role-playing is the use of case studies that simulate actual organisational
dilemmas. This is a popular and widely-used format. There are many styles of case
study analysis; however, the model suggested by Malloy et al. (2003) offers an
alternative to standard formats in that it is more holistic (i.e., brings more internal
and external variables to the analysis), and involves the students in critical thinking
(Jones & Sheridan, 1999). We suggest that case studies can be an effective tool, not
only through analysis of previously written cases, but also through the experience
of students writing their own case studies, to which peers then provide a critical
analysis and problem resolution.
Reflective Journaling
One effective technique for instructing students to think critically is having each
student keep a clinical journal. Hancock (1999) stated that "reflective practice learning
journals have become a valued teaching and learning tool in nursing education"
(p. 37). Journaling can prove to be a valuable medium to assist sport management
educators to teach through questioning and to foster the development of an inquiring
mind. It can also help students reflect on changes in their critical thinking abilities
at the beginning and at the end of a work experience course. Students can reflect
their practical experience through the act of writing. In writing, students can "think
aloud" objectively and transfer their thoughts and perceptions onto paper, carefully
documenting subjective and objective observations, scrutinising alternatives,
exploring, critiquing their ideas, and analysing and evaluating experiences.
In summing up, the preceding section suggests that the practice of sport
management requires that sport managers continuously adapt and develop their
knowledge and skills. The rapidity of change means that it is no longer sufficient to
rely on knowledge gained in school to effectively accommodate changing demands.
Sport management educators today are confronted with the challenge to develop
critical thinking skills in their sport management courses. They are also aware of
the need for teaching students the skills for analysis, reasoning, evaluating, and
developing their own opinions. To enable students to achieve these skills, sport
management educators are instrumental in providing guidance, assistance, role
modelling, and instructional methods required in promoting critical thinking skills.
Educators must also reflect on their own critical thinking and have developed their
own value frameworks, moral stances, and ethical standards to be a good guide for
their students.
In contemplating instructional methods, it is clear that the process of
questioning is a common theme embedded throughout all the strategies. Questions
that initiate thinking urge students to make inferences and comparisons, solve
problems, construct hypotheses, and evaluate information, hence developing
high-level skills. As an important element in critical thinking, questioning should
be incorporated into all teaching techniques to make learning more effective in
developing students' inquiring minds.
Critical and Ethical Thinking
Conclusions
The main function of this paper has been to examine ways that sport management
educators can develop their students' abilities to link thought and action. Another
purpose was to provide a framework that challenges assumptions held as part of
current knowledge structures (i.e., to become critical thinkers). Alvesson and Deetz
(2000) note that:
all social research [studies] take place out of a background set of ontological,
epistemological and axiological assumptions. These provide taken-for-granted
understandings of the world and the people in it, preferred methods for discovering
what is true or worth knowing, and basic moral and aesthetic judgments about
appropriate conduct and quality of life. (p. 23)
Whether discussing the basic elements of critical thinking as we do here, or
discussing critical social science, critical management studies, or critical management
research, the same points hold. Praxis is determined not only by critical thinking, but
by purposeful action.
An argument for a two-staged, interrelated process in this development
was made. The first stage focuses on reflective thinking. The process of thinking,
knowing, and acting toward developing reflective thinking abilities begins when
students start with an understanding of themselves, their thought processes, and
their life experiences via self-reflection. Through objectively reflecting on their
subjective ability to think, know and act, the nascent sport manager is able to be
reflexive. That is, the world is viewed more clearly and as less encumbered than
before. From this point, changes in the objective way knowledge is used to perceive
and to then act in the world begins. They become authentic change agents through
the capacity to act reflexively.
In the social sciences this is also associated with the philosophical tradition
of hermeneutics, or the theory of interpretation. Here is the idea that all humans
receive and act in a pre-interpreted world. There are knowledge structures of different
strengths, both in content and power, available and given to them in different ways
by different persons throughout life. To be reflexive demands that they begin to
understand the ideas and values behind particular interpretations and then begin to
act in ways that permits them to act upon and change the world.
Sport management professionals must interpret what others have already
interpreted both in thought and action. In short, they must approach their social
roles in a way that allows them to go beyond accepting things as they immediately
appear. They must move to a position where they examine matters in a critical way.
By delving below the surface of immediate impressions they can include the deeper,
hidden processes occurring in the situation encountered.
This will involve risk, which is part of managerial life and should be worth
the effort. Brookfield (1991) captured such possibilities in the following:
Zakus, Malluy & Edwards
Taking the risk to think critically, and to realise in our actions the insights we gain
through this, is one of the most powerfbl activities of adult life. The reason we
persist in doing this, even when it seems to produce only frustration, perplexity,
and anxiety, is the rewards it produces. As critical thinkers we are engaged in a
continual process of creating and re-creating our person, work, and political lives.
We do not take our identities as settled; rather, we are aware of the scope for
development in all areas of life. We see the future as open to our influence. We
regard the world as changeable through our own individual actions and through
collective action in concert with others who share our commitment to broader
political and social changes. We do not accept the idea that because things are
the way they are now, they must always be this way. And we do not think that we
(or anyone else) have the ultimate answer to life's ambiguities and problems. But
we do have confidence in knowing that those things in which we believe, and the
actions we take arising out of these beliefs, spring from a process of careful analysis
and testing against reality--in other words, from critical thinking. (p. 254)
The second concomitant process is praxis. This second, higher stage of
thinking goes beyond the objective/subjective unity of reflexive thinking toward
individuals applying theory to practice. Once students have started to become
reflexive thinkers, they can extend their knowledge through different educational
experiences and then use this higher level of knowledge in their every day and
professional activities. Here we note that context is important as the professional
practice of sport managers (and their critical sensibilities) is necessarily contextually
informed and variable in both synchronic and diachronic senses. Once they have
become authentic thinkers, application of higher levels of theoretical knowledge to
practical and professional life activities is possible. Both reflective knowledge and
praxis will lead them toward being authentic, ethical, and critical thinkers who can
handle any challenging, decision-making situation with acumen.
Toward this end, sport management educators must have notions of student
learning styles, capabilities, and orientations. Tying learning and assessment into
coherent critical thinking capabilities and experiences will assist in the development
of methods and teaching practices. The challenge is therefore demanding. It asks
educators to understand what it is they are trying to achieve and how that can best
be achieved. As Frisby (2005) notes, "embracing CSS and exposing students, hture
researchers, and managers to it opens up a new world that, up to this point, has been
inadequately explored" (p. 9). In sum, it demands that we work toward Brookfield's
(1990) "critically responsive teaching."
Critical and Ethical Thinking
155
References
Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1980). Theory inpractice: Increasingprofessional effectiveness.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Biggs, J.B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher
Education, 32, 347-364.
Brigharn, C. (1993). Nursing education and critical thinking: Interplay of content and
thinking. Holistic Nurse Practice, 7,48-54.
Brookfield, S.D. (1990). The skillful teacher: San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
BrooNeld, S.D. (1991). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore
alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Browne, M.N., & Keeley, S.M. (1986). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical
thinking (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chubinski, S. (1996). Creative critical thinking strategies. Nurse Educator, 21, 23-27.
Clegg, S., Courpasson, D., & Phillips, N. (2006). Power and organisations. London:
Sage.
Daniel, M.F., & Bergman-Drewe, S. (1998). Higher-order thinking, philosophy, and
teacher education in physical education. Quest, 50, 33-58.
Daly, W.M. (1998). Critical thinking as an outcome of nursing education. What is it?
Why is it important to nursing practice? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28, 323331.
de Bono, E. (1978). The use of lateral thinking. London: Penguin.
Doyle, R.M. (1996). Debate: A strategy for understanding primary health care. Journal
of Nursing Education, 35, 379-38 1.
Elliott, D. (1996). Promoting critical thinking in the classroom. Nurse Educator, 21,
49-52.
Edwards, A. (1999). Reflective practice in sport management. Sport Management
Review, 2,67-8 1.
England, G.W., Dhingra, O.P., & Agarwal, N.C. (1974). The manager and the man: A
cross-cultural study ofpersonal values. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
Entwistle, N. (1997). Constrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell,
& N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implicationsfor teaching and
studying in higher education (pp. 37-74). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Femandez-Balboa, J-M. (1995). Reclaiming physical education in higher education
through critical pedagogy. Quest, 47,91- 114.
Flew, A. (1979). A dictionary ofphilosophy. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Frisby, W. (2005). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Critical sport management research.
Journal of Sport Management, 19, 1- 12.
Fuszard, B. (1989). Innovative teaching strategies in nursing. Rockville, M D : Aspen.
Garrett, M. (1996). Debate: A teaching strategy to improve verbal communication and
critical thinking skills. Nurse Educator, 21, 37-40.
Gleick, J. (1996). Chaos: Making a new science. London: Minerva.
156
Zukus, Malloy & Edwards
Hagedorn, R. (1994). Sociology (5th ed.). Toronto: Harcourt Brace.
Hancock, P. (1999). Reflective practice - Using a learning journal. Nursing Standard,
13(17), 37-40.
Heidegger, M. (1966). Discourse on thinking. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Hodgkinson, C. (1983). The philosophy of leadership. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hodgkinson, C. (1996). Administrativephilosophy. Oxford: Pergamon.
Jones, S.A., & Brown, L.N. (1993). Alternative views on defining critical thinking
through the nursing process. Holistic Nurse Practice, 7,71-76.
Jones, D.C., & Sheridan, M. (1999). A case study approach: Developing critical thinking
skills in novice pediatric nurses. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing,
30,75-78.
King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across
the curriculum. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 13-17.
King, D.M., & Kitchener, K.S. (1994). Developing reflectivejudgment: Understanding
and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kolb, D.A. (1985). Learning-style inventory. Boston: MayIMcBer.
Lawson, H. (1984). Invitation to physical education. Champaign, 1L: Human Kinetics.
Liedtka, J.M. (1989). Value congruence: The interplay of individual and organisational
value systems. Journal ofBusiness Ethics, 8, 805-815.
Macintosh, D., & Whitson, D. (1990). Thegameplanners: Transforming Canada j. sport
system. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Macquarrie, J. (1972). An introduction, guide, and assessment: Existentialism. New
York: Penguin Books.
Malloy, D.C. (1992). Ethics in Canadian university curricula. Canadian Journal of
Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 58, 27-33.
Malloy, D.C., Prapavessis, H., & Zakus, D.H. (1994). Teaching applied ethics in adult
educational contexts: Instructional modules for the human movement student and
practitioner. The ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal, 41, 14-17.
Malloy, D.C., Ross, S., & Zakus, D.H. (2003). Ethics in action: Cases and concepts in
sport and recreation (2nd ed.). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.
Malloy, D.C., & Zakus, D.H. (2004). Harassment issues in sport organisations:
Commentaries on utilitarian, justice, Kantian, and existential approaches to moral
ontology. Quest, 56, 32 1-336.
Malloy, D.C., & Zakus, D.H. (1995). Toward a critical pedagogy in ethical decision
making in sport administration: A theoretical inquiry into substance and form.
Journal of Sport Management, 9,36-58.
Marchak, P. (1981). Ideological perspectives in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill
Ryerson.
McBride, R.E. (1992). Critical thinking--An overview with implications for physical
education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 11, 112-125.
McKeachic, W.J. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher
Critical and Ethical Thinking
157
(4th ed.). Toronto: D.C. Heath.
Mills, C.W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
Neill, K., Lachat, M., & Taylor-Panek, S. (1997). Enhancing critical thinking with case
studies and nursing process. Nurse Educator, 22, 30-32.
Paul, R. (1990). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly
changing world. Rohnertt Park, CA: Center for Critical Thinking and Moral
Critique.
Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (1994). Inevitable illusions: How mistakes of reason rule our
minds. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Porter Ladousse, G. (1988). Role-play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.
Rein, M. (1983). Value-critical policy analysis. In D. Callahan & B. Jennings (Eds.),
Ethics, the social sciences, and policy analysis (pp. 83-111). New York: Plenum
Press.
Rein, M., & Schon, D.A. (1977). Problem setting in policy research. In C. A. Weiss
(Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 235-25 1). Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books.
Ross, S. (1994). Sport sciences and the whole person. CAHPER, 1, 109-116.
Saul, J.R. (1993). Voltaireb bastards: The dictatorship of reason in the west. Toronto:
Penguin.
Saul, J.R. (1995). The unconscious civilization. Concord, ON: Anansi.
Sellappah, S., Hussey, T., Blackmore, A.M., & McMurray, A. (1998). The use of
questioning strategies by clinical teachers. Journal ofAdvanced Nursing, 18, 142148.
Schon, D.A. (1980). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social
policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 13-34). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Schon, D.A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for
teaching and learning in theprofessions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stunkel, R. (1998, June). The lecture: A powerful tool for intellectual liberation. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 26, A52.
Theodorson, G.A., & Theodorson, A.G. (1969). A modern dictionary of sociology. New
York: Barnes & Noble.
Venetzian, E., & Corrigan, B. (1996). "Prep" for class and class activity. Nurse Educator,
21,45-48.
Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolsterstorff, N. (1996, September). Does truth still matter in thepostmodern university?
Luther Lecture, Luther College, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan,
Canada.
Zakus, D.H., & Edwards, A. (2006). Critical thinking in sport management. In J.
Parks, J. Quarteman, & L. Thibault (Eds.), Contemporary Sport Management
(3rd ed., p. 50) Champaign, 1L: Human Kinetics.
Zakus, D.H., & Malloy, D.C. (1996). Critical evaluation of ethics: A new pedagogy in
158
Zakus, Malloy & Edwards
sport administration. Quest, 48, 522-538.
Zeigler, E.F. (1994). Critical thinking for the professions of health, sport, & physical
education, recreation, and dance. Champaign, 1L: Stipes.
Zeigler, E.F. (1995). Competency in critical thinking: A requirement for the "allied
professional." Quest, 47, 196-211.